This copy is for your personal non-commercial use only. To order presentation-ready copies of Toronto Star content for distribution to colleagues, clients or customers, or inquire about permissions/licensing, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com

Why Star chose not to republish cartoons: Public Editor

Republishing the Charlie Hebdo cartoons depicting the Prophet Muhammad would be a violation of the Star’s policy regarding respect for religion.

In the aftermath of the Charlie Hebdo killings, as the cry of “Je Suis Charlie” rang out globally in support of free expression, the Star faced the question of whether to republish the provocative images at the heart of this tragedy.
(Jacques Brinon / AP)

When new recruits join the Toronto Star’s newsroom, it falls to me to acquaint them with the Star’s journalistic policies and ethical standards.

I begin our orientation session by reminding them that the Toronto Star is not some start-up operation making a bet on the future of journalism. We are a news organization that has been deeply rooted in its community for nearly 123 years. As such, the Star and
its long-standing progressive values
stand for something in our community.

Among the Star’s primary values is a fierce commitment to free expression and reporting the truth fairly and accurately. So too is the Star committed to equality, tolerance, individual and civil liberties, and a strong and united Canada.

In reporting and presenting the news, sometimes these values conflict. Indeed, we’ve seen that writ large in past days with the Star’s decision following the murder of 12 people at the satirical French newspaper, Charlie Hebdo, not to republish that news organization’s incendiary editorial cartoons that depict the Prophet Muhammad.

In the aftermath of the killings, as the cry of “Je Suis Charlie” rang out globally in support of free expression, the Star,
like other news organizations
with similar values, faced the serious question of whether to publish the provocative images at the heart of this tragedy.

Article Continued Below

On one hand, those inflammatory images, as well as the image of the Prophet drawn for the cover of the new Charlie Hebdo edition produced this week in defiance of the massacre, are of course newsworthy. I defy anyone to argue that they are not.

On the other hand, the images are offensive and hurtful to Muslims, who consider such depiction of the Prophet insulting and disrespectful of their religion. To publish them would to my mind be a violation of the
Star’s policy regarding respect for religion
, a policy rooted firmly in the Star’s values.

That policy recognizes that while Canadians live in a secular society, religion does matter to many: “Religion is important to the lives of many of our readers,” it states. “Do not single out a religion or religious practice for ridicule or stereotyping.”

That means treating all religions with equal respect. Though, it should be said, the Star sometimes falls short of this standard. In 2003, it printed an apology to local Hindus for its “insensitivity” in publishing a picture of an undraped statue of the goddess Maa Durga.

The year before, the
Ontario Press Council
upheld a complaint by the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada that an opinion column in the Star had targeted evangelical Christians in a way that tended to engender bias and hatred toward them.

Certainly the Star would not publish anti-Semitic images and we would, rightly, expect a massive outcry in our community if we fell short of our standards and values here. Organizations across Canada and throughout North America peruse the Star carefully every day to make certain no anti-Semitic content is published.

You can be sure the Star gave careful, serious consideration at its highest levels to the question of whether to publish the provocative Charlie Hebdo images of the Prophet, understanding that they were produced in a very different cultural context than exists here, and knowing that a deliberate decision to reprint them would most certainly cause significant offence.

“Do you have an obligation for reasons of journalistic ethics to actually reprint what’s gone on in a particular environment, one that’s very different from your own?” said John Cruickshank, the Star’s publisher, in explaining this news organization’s decision on
CBC Radio’s Metro Morning
last week.

Cruickshank said there was “genuine concern” the Star would be “printing something that a significant portion of this population would be offended by,” adding, “Why would we do that?

“It’s always the situation where somebody says you’ve got a principle here to humiliate people, make them feel bad about what they believe. I actually think it’s time now, and we’re mature enough to say, ‘you know what, we’re not going to do that.’”

“Religion is not a battleground for free speech in Canada,” Cooke said. “Why would I authorize the publication of an image many Torontonians find profoundly objectionable just because I can?”

For my part, it’s my role to judge readers’ concerns about the Star’s journalism against its own policies. On this measure, clearly there is no policy violation. As I told those readers who expressed dismay with the Star’s decision, the Star took a principled stand here.

I must admit though, I’ve debated this issue within my own mind for much of the past week. I truly understand both sides of this dilemma. The images have strong news value. People died for them.

But, a clear decision had to be made and I believe the Star made the right choice. In facing a clash of two important, long-held values, I am glad the Star placed human values above strict news values and gave greater weight to the Star’s standard of respect for all people in its community, whatever their religion, race or sexual orientation.

This judgment call caused no real harm to anyone. If you wish to see the cartoons you can. Their very newsworthiness means they are easily available to anyone who chooses to look for them online.

And I don’t buy the argument that the Star’s commitment to freedom of expression lives or dies on whether we published the inflammatory images. The vigorous, wide-ranging debate about this issue that’s been published within the Star in past days is evidence of that. The Star pushes the envelope for freedom of expression when it believes it truly matters and I expect it will continue to do so — while still seeking a balance with competing values.

I also agree with the point made in a
column by NOW Magazine’s Susan G. Cole
that “editorial policy is not the same as censorship” and “it would be a true travesty if this awful situation influenced media decision-makers to publish anything that doesn’t meet their editorial standards.”

And, of course, free speech is not an unfettered right, even in Canada where our Charter guarantees freedom of expression. With freedom comes responsibility to exercise prudent judgment.

Finally, I look to the wisdom of the
Star’s own editorial cartoonist, Theo Moudakis,
who pushes that free expression envelope many days in exercising the editorial cartoonist’s latitude to satirize, mock, lampoon and ridicule those in the news to make a point and provoke debate.

He agreed with the Star’s principled stance not to reprint the Charlie Hebdo cartoons, concurring that even editorial cartoonists must draw the line somewhere. Determining where that line lies depends much on a news organization and its values.

“We are a very different society and culture than Charlie Hebdo,” Moudakis said. “Respect for fellow humans supersedes any need to offend.”

“We are not Charlie Hebdo, we are the Toronto Star.”

Indeed, we
are
the Toronto Star.

Correction- Jan. 16, 2015:
This article was edited from a previous version that mistakenly said 12 editorial cartoonists were killed in the attack on Charlie Hebdo. In fact, it was 12 people, which included 5 editorial cartoonists.

More from the Toronto Star & Partners

LOADING

Copyright owned or licensed by Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Republication or distribution of this content is expressly prohibited without the prior written consent of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited and/or its licensors. To order copies of Toronto Star articles, please go to: www.TorontoStarReprints.com